(Sigh) So, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church and the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, weren't.
If Bp. Fellay were operating within the bounds of dogma and Tradition, he would be inside the Church, not outside, setting conditions and making demands to get back in, or else.
-Theo
Which specific dogmas did they define?
Lumen Gentium No. 25 is a reiteration of Vatican I on the authority of the Pope.
Just because something is called a "dogmatic constitution," does not make the entirety of its contents dogmatic.
Where are the dogmas? Please point them out for me.
"If Bp. Fellay were operating within the bounds of dogma and Tradition, he would be inside the Church, not outside, setting conditions and making demands to get back in, or else."
http://www.30giorni.it/us/articolo_stampa.asp?id=9360
Monsignor Lefebvre did not back off…
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Unfortunately Monsignor Lefebvre went ahead with the consecration and hence the situation of separation came about, even if it was not a formal schism.
In at least two other interviews after this one, Cardinal Hoyos reiterated that the SSPX is in the body of the Church, even if not in "perfect" communion canonically. This would NOT make them outside the Church. You are in error.
You cannot have it both ways. Either use the post-Conciliar ecclesiology or the pre-Conciliar ecclesiology. Doesn't the sacrament of baptism put one in the body of the Church, at least to the age of reason.
Whis is it? Outside or inside? Or perfect or imperfect communion?